search for: postmorterm

Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "postmorterm".

Did you mean: postmortem
2018 Nov 30
5
[PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
...(and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what > the responsibility part here means. > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm. > > Is this wrong interpretation? Should I conclude that I made a mistake > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says? > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before. Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretati...
2018 Nov 30
3
[PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 13:44 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:01:02PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > No because use of what some people consider to be bad language > > isn't necessarily abusive, offensive or degrading. Our most > > heavily censored medium is TV and "fuck" is now considered > > acceptable in certain contexts on
2018 Nov 30
0
[PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
...As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what the responsibility part here means. I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm. Is this wrong interpretation? Should I conclude that I made a mistake by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says? After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before. /Jarkko
2018 Nov 30
0
[PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
...sturbed feedback from > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what > > the responsibility part here means. > > > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for > > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm. > > > > Is this wrong interpretation? Should I conclude that I made a mistake > > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says? > > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before. > > Have you read Documentation/proces...
2018 Dec 01
0
[PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
...isturbed feedback from > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what > > the responsibility part here means. > > > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for > > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm. > > > > Is this wrong interpretation? Should I conclude that I made a mistake > > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says? > > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before. > > Have you read Documentation/process/...